Iterations

Reviewing Articles

We require article reviewers to apply a consistent framework of questions when reviewing articles.

Reviewer questions

For the academic research articles, the reviewers use the following questions:

• Is the research strategy (i.e. aim, purpose and rationale) clearly stated?
• Is the chosen methodology adequate to find out what they want to find out in this study? Would other methods provide a substantial improvement?
• Do the title and abstract reflect the content of the article adequately?
• Is the significance of the research/article clearly explained relative to the existing literature or design practice?
• Does the article offer new insights and contributions to the development of design research and practice?
• How well do the researchers place their findings within the context of ongoing design research or practice?
• Have the authors provided sufficient evidence for claims they are making? If not, what further evidence/data needs to be included?
• Are there adequate references to other credible research?

– Article structure and style

• Is the article clearly written and well organised?
• Does the introduction provide sufficient background information to enable readers to better understand the problem being identified by the authors?
• Does the article tell a story i.e. taking the reader from the research questions posed to the conclusions and discussions? Is the logic clear?
• Do all the diagrams, figures and tables help the reader better understand the article? If not, which should be removed or replaced?
• Are there any typographical and syntactical errors?
• Is the length of the article appropriate?
• Is the writing and language concise, clear and unambiguous? Has jargon (statistical or conceptual) been minimised?
• Would it be accessible for someone from a different discipline or to an industry, public or policy audience?
• Are all abbreviations used explained and introduced at the right time in the article?

For practice based articles, reviews and opinion pieces the following questions are used:

• Is the article clearly written and well organised?
• Is the writing and language concise, clear and unambiguous? Has jargon been minimised?
• Is the significance of the article clearly explained relative to existing or emerging design practice?
• Does the article tell a story? Is the logic clear?
• Do all the diagrams, figures and tables help the reader better understand the article? If not, which should be removed or replaced?
• Are there any typographical and syntactical errors?
• Is the length of the article appropriate?
• Would it be accessible and interesting to non-designers?
• Are all abbreviations used explained and introduced at the right time in the article?

Recommendations

After due consideration, can you please choose one of the following recommendations for the editor:

1. Accept
2. Accept after minor revision
3. Major revision
4. Reject